I think the flame nebula went out...

[blinkity-blonk]

Recently I've been trying to capture the flame and horsehead nebula. So far I've had 2 actual attempts and numerous clouded off attempts. The first actual go I had was my worst session to date, but the second go was perfect - conditions were great, polar alignment went unusually well as did levelling the scope. I got about 20 perfect 60 second exposures of the Alnitak region fully expecting them to yield at least some recognisable features but when I came to process them... nothing!! not even a smudge! just Alnitak and some neighbouring stars.

Am I doing something horrendously wrong to miss the nebulas? do they need special filters to capture them? or are they really just that faint?

My scope needs collimating badly but I can get the ring neb, andromeda and other things easy enough and the flame is brighter than them (I think)

I'm really starting to think the horsehead nebula needs renaming to the unicorn nebula - its impossible to capture!

any tips or thought appreciated - feel free to state the obvious or point out my stupidity (its the only way I'll learn)

[Starman]

This is a 120s image taken through (I think) an 80mm refractor with a focal reducer fitted. The camera was a modified 40D.

The Horse Head is pretty faint. Try loading your shot up in a graphics program and adjusting the curves excessively just to bring out what's there. Using the shot below you should be able to identify exactly where it should be.

[Starman]

BTW this image is rotated by 90 degrees anti-clockwise. The bright star at the top being Alnilam and Alnitak being the brightest star in the lower half of the image.

[jgs001]

I had a bash at this last year with an unmodded camera... I fired about 8 x 4 minute subs at ISO1600 and they were barely visible. You don't mention what camera you're using, but I'd guess it's unmodded, which means that most of the interesting stuff you're after (Ha red) is being blocked by the camera's in built IR filter. This means to capture them you're going to need to take a real shedload (100-150+) of subs as long as you can manage.

[SteveL]

You don't mention what camera you're using, but I'd guess it's unmodded...

In original post

"The camera was a modified 40D"

[brendant]

As the guys have said it is possible with an unmodified camera to capture the Horsehead but you need much longer exposures.

Attached are two images I have taken with a standard Canon 400D unmodded and modified for comparison. The first image is 2 Hrs 23Min's worth of exposure a combination of 2-3 minute exposures combined from the standard unmodified 400D, the second image is only 7x 5 minute exposures with a modified 400D.

As this region is very rich in Ha a modified camera makes a huge difference as stated earlier, it can be done with your unmodded camera but you need longer exposures and lots more of them.

Hope this helps.

Brendan

[blinkity-blonk]

Thanks for the answers there, they help a lot I had a feeling it might be because of the camera blocking the wrong wavelengths, it is a standard camera I'm using at the moment. I'll carry on getting as many subs as I can through the winter. I can only see Orion for about an hour each night as it moves between 2 trees, so it may take a while. Its still very addictive even when there's no obvious results but only an hour a night leaves plenty of time to look at other stuff

Thanks for those photos too, Starman. I've been looking for one like that just so I know where I'm actually looking.

[blinkity-blonk]

I've just had a play around with my photo against Starman's... I think I can explain at least some of why I cant see the horsehead

my F.o.V is the black square

[blinkity-blonk]

I've just had a play around with my photo against Starman's... I think I can explain at least some of why I cant see the horse head:

my F.o.V is the black square oops

[MikeP]

Nice one BB.

Mike